./.  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/RL/W/174/Rev.1 
7 April 2005 
 (05-1412) 
Negotiating Group on Rules Original:   English 
  
 
PUBLIC INTEREST 
 
Paper from Chile;  Costa Rica;  Hong Kong, China;  Israel;  Japan;  Korea, Rep. of;
 
Norway;  Singapore;  Switzerland;  the Se parate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu,  
Kinmen and Matsu;  and Thailand  
 
Revision  
   The following communication, dated 24 March 2005, is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegations of Chile;  Costa Rica;  Hong Kong, Chin a;  Israel;  Japan;  Korea, Rep. of; Norway;  
Singapore;  Switzerland;  the Separate Customs Te rritory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu;  
and Thailand.  
_______________ 
  
A. Description of the problem
 
  The Anti-Dumping Agreement allows an anti- dumping measure to be used to protect the 
domestic industry of an importing member from injuri ous dumping.  However, the effects of an anti-
dumping measure are not confined to the domestic industry of the importing member, but also on 
trade and economy of the importing member.  The existence of an anti-dumping measure affects the trade flow between the importing member and the members where the dumped products originate or 
pass through.  Within the domestic context, the e ffects of an anti-dumping measure spread to other 
sectors of the economy such as purchasers of th e investigated products (industrial users and 
consumers) and the import, wholesale and retail ser vices sectors, affecting productivity, competition, 
allocation of resources, purchasi ng and consumption decisions.  While an anti-dumping measure 
directly addresses the concerns of the domestic indus try, the cost of such measures is borne by the 
economy of the importing member as a whole, ultimately passing to taxpayers.    Given the widespread effects anti-dumping measures may have on the economy of the 
importing member as a whole, besides affecting external trade flows and potentially reducing market 
access benefits secured by a member under the WTO agreements, the current Anti-Dumping 
Agreement nevertheless contains no provision for the broader economic interest of the importing 
member to be taken into account before a decisi on is taken to impose an anti-dumping measure, nor, 
from that perspective, provides opportunities for rele vant parties to present their views on the broader 
economic consequences that the measure may entail.  
  Providing for the broader economic interest of an importing member to be considered before 
anti-dumping measures are applied would help ensure that, while Members still have the right to use 
anti-dumping measures, the application of such meas ures will be consistent with the overall economic 
interest of the importing member.  Such analysis, if properly conducted, would help ensure that the 
use of anti-dumping measures has a sound economic basis, and would help dispel concerns that some 
members may use anti-dumping measures as a convenient tool to reduce access to their markets.  This TN/RL/W/174/Rev.1 
Page 2  
 
 would have a positive effect on promoting trade of the importing member and on the economic 
development in the importing member, and suits the multilateral trading system well.   B. Provisions on public interest
 
 
 The inclusion of provisions on public interest in the Anti-dumping Agreement was raised in 
an earlier paper of the Friends of Anti-dumping Negotiations (“FANs”).1  This paper elaborates on 
our thinking, and proposes a possible framework for such provisions focusing on the following four main elements:   
1. public interest
2::  include a provision in the Anti-Dumping Agreement providing for 
authorities to determine, before applying an anti-dumping measure, whether the proposed measure is in the overall economic interest of that Member.  The anti-dumping measure should not be applied, or the measure should be mitigated
3, if the application of the measure is 
not in the overall economic interest of that Member; 
 
2. minimum factors for consideration :  to ensure a balanced and meaningful consideration of 
public interest, we propose that the ADA specifies certain key economic factors which should be taken into account when considering public in terest, for example, the cost effect of the 
proposed anti-dumping measure on industrial users, consumers, importers, wholesalers and retailers, productivity effect on downstream user s, competition and availability of choice to 
users.  Such list would be non-exhaustive a nd would not preclude Members from taking into 
account other economic factors which they c onsider relevant for the purpose of the 
consideration;   
 3. right for interested members of th e public to present information :  interested members of 
the public should be able to present facts and vi ews in connection with the consideration of 
public interest
4, and to access relevant information for this purpose; 
 4. transparency :  authorities should disclose their findings  and explain how relevant facts have 
been evaluated in their determination.   
 
 The FANs reserve the right to elaborate on these proposals in future.  In particular, the FANs 
would be happy to discuss with Members further on how the public interest provision would work in 
practice, both in terms of substance and procedures.     
__________ 
 
 
                                                     
 
1 TN/RL/W/6.  Canada and the EC have also made proposals for including a public interest element in 
the ADA - see TN/RL/W/1 and 47; TN/RL/W/13.   
2 While the public interest provision proposed in this paper focuses on economic considerations, this 
proposal does not preclude Members from taking other non-economic considerations into account in deciding 
not to apply an AD measure. 
3 The FANs would be open to discuss with Members as to how AD measures may be mitigated (for 
example, by reducing the duty level, reducing the period of application of the anti-dumping measure, or by 
suspension of the measure).   
4 For this purpose, public notice should be published, notification sent to known interested persons (e.g. 
industrial users, consumer organisations, wholesalers, retailers, importers and parties to the investigation), and 
members of the public given a reasonable pe riod to present their facts and views.